More handpicked essays just for you.
Law enforcement media influence peoples perceptions
How does the media influence the public perception of the police
Media influence on law enforcement research
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The definition of forensic science is any scientific research, method, or theory used to analyze evidence in an attempt to solve legal cases (Cho). In recent years, there has been growing public interest in forensic science, arguably because of the numerous television programs that glamorize its practices. This phenomenon is part of what is known as the CSI effect, or the process through which devoted fans of popular crime dramas develop unrealistic notions of forensic science methods, practices, and their applications in real life cases (Mancini 544; Stevens 37; Ley, Jankowski, and Brewer 52). The CSI effect has had more negative impacts on forensic science and society than positive impacts, especially in regards to what goes on in the minds of jurors who frequently watch television programs about crime. Studying the CSI effect also leads to tough questions about the ethics of portraying real stories to entertain the audience. The use of these true stories is justified in certain contexts, such as instances when societal issues arise, and as long as there is respect toward the privacy of family members and friends involved in such tragedies. The solution to the negative consequences of the CSI effect could be to produce television programs that are somehow informative and entertaining, but this would make it difficult to hold the interest of a viewing audience that craves drama and action.
The CSI effect began because of the portrayal of forensic science in popular television programs and movies. In their article “Investigating CSI: Portrayals of DNA testing on a forensic crime show and their potential effects”, Barbara L. Ley, Natalie Jankowski, and Paul R. Brewer refer to the characteristics of crime shows that make them app...
... middle of paper ...
... 2014.
Mancini, Dante E. "The "CSI Effect" In An Actual Juror Sample: Why Crime Show Genre May Matter." North American Journal Of Psychology 15.3 (2013): 543-564. Academic Search Complete. Web. 22 Feb. 2014.
Schweitzer, N. J., and Michael J. Saks. "The CSI Effect: Popular Fiction About Forensic Science Affects The Public's Expectations About Real Forensic Science." Jurimetrics: The Journal Of Law, Science & Technology 47.3 (2007): 357-364. Index to Legal Periodicals & Books Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 21 Feb. 2014
Stevens, Dennis J. "Forensic Science, Wrongful Convictions, And American Prosecutor Discretion." Howard Journal Of Criminal Justice 47.1 (2008): 31-51. PsycINFO. Web. 22 Feb. 2014.
"Unreliable or Improper Forensic Science." The Innocence Project. Web. 21 Feb. 2014. .
Since the airing of the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and the other televised series that followed have led jurors to compare fiction with reality. The shows have changed the view on the real world of forensic science as the series have a world of forensic science of their own. For this paper the televised series titled Bones by forensic anthropologist Kathy Reichs will be used as an example for comparison. In the series Bones Dr. Temperance Brenan arrives at the scene of the crime to examine the skeletal remains found in the scene of the crime equipped with one or more forensic kits. Upon momentarily examining the skeletal remains Dr. Brenan is able to determine the gender, ethnicity, and age. When this type of scenario is compared to nonfictional
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation was introduced to viewers in October 2000. Since that time, the franchise has added two versions in major metropolitan areas, now addressing crime scenarios in Las Vegas, Miami and New York City. Based on the most recent Nielsen ratings for primetime television shows, the CSI franchise claimed approximately 35 million viewers during the 2010 – 2011 viewing season. The popularity of forensic science drama on television has led officers of the court to voice opinions that there is a “CSI effect” which alters the juror pools and outcomes of criminal trial proceedings. The differences between made for television fiction and actual crime solving are many and when jurors consider themselves pseudo-experts those lines may get blurred in the courtroom.
Specifically, crime shows have given us, the TV audience as a whole, scripts or an expectation of what will/should happen in a variety of situations. It leads people to think about what is appropriate and what isn’t in terms of how the results of these situations play out. For example, in the CSI franchise, as the plot unfolds in each episode, it takes forensic evidence, such as DNA or fingerprints, to convict the villain. Before the technological breakthroughs made in the fields of biology and forensics, juries relied more on circumstantial evidence, and eyewitness accounts to prove someone was guilty. This is just one example of how crime shows have changed the general representations of what is the “correct” way to solve a crime.
Crime is a common public issue for people living in the inner city, but is not limited to only urban or highly populated cities as it can undoubtedly happen in small community and rural areas as well. In The Real CSI, the documentary exemplified many way in which experts used forensic science as evidence in trial cases to argue and to prove whether a person is innocent or guilty. In this paper, I explained the difference in fingerprinting technology depicted between television shows and in reality, how DNA technology change the way forensics evidence is used in the court proceedings, and how forensic evidence can be misused in the United States adversarial legal system.
With a record of an average 119 television channels available to each household, television dominates American life (MediaBuyerPlanner). This wide assortment of television gives viewers many different realities to imitate, like a small child following and obeying its parent. One of the leading television shows in our society is the CSI franchise, with three different extensions. CSI, and shows similar to it, portray the criminal justice system in a negative light, which causes confusion between reality and fiction. Television is a means of entertainment, yet its influence on today’s generation is powerful and enchanting. Television shows centered on criminal justice are implausible portrayals of reality that create unrealistic expectations of evidence in the courtroom, as well as creating superfluous fear of murder for the viewers.
In Richards Willing’s “CSI effect” the author tells the reader how, as a result of crime scene shows’ popularity, the misconceptions they create, and the combining of real life events with TV fantasy, crime scene shows have affected jurors and the oucomes of court cases. The shows’ popularity has increased peoples’ interest in forensic science and has caused workers and students to transfer into the field. The second effect crime scenes created is the misconception concerning when to use forensic tests, as well as misconceptions about the speed and accuracy of forensic workers and machines in tracking and identifying the culprit. Willing tells of a murder trial in Arizona in which the defendant’s bloody coat was listed as evidence, but was not tested. Although the defendant had already told investigators that he was at the scene of the crime, with the jacket, jurors asked for forensic DNA evidence linking the defendant to the bloody coat and to the crime scene. The juror’s exposure to crime scene shows had given them knowledge of forensic tests, but not knowledge of the proper use of the tests. Crime scene shows mix real life with TV fantasy. According to willing’s studies, highly attractive forensic workers and stunning suspects, along with very neat crime scenes on crime scene shows deemphasize the real life violence and brutality of crime. Similarly, tv reality shows have influenced people’s ideas about real life and real relationships through the effects of image, misleading information, and popularity.
Therefore, the criminal justice system relies on other nonscientific means that are not accepted or clear. Many of forensic methods have implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or anything to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011). Defense experts are required to help the defense attorneys defend and breakdown all of the doubts in the prosecutors scientific findings in criminal cases. Scientific information is integral in a criminal prosecution, and a defense attorney needs to have an expert to assist he/she in discrediting the prosecution (Giannelli,
Many current crime dramas give younger female viewers female role models in professionally powerful positions. Studies have shown that law and criminal based television genre has had a tremendous influence on career choices in forensic science on young viewers (qtd. in O’Donnell “Sample Criticism” (216). An example of this popular trend is Law and Order: SVU who commonly casts ...
This same article examines the history of DNA evidence and acknowledges that when evidence was first introduced to the courts that the new type of identification was initially accepted without any challenges, however, critics quickly contended that DNA tests were problematic because of the reliability and the validity of probative value of the evidence. For example, DNA exoneration cases suggest that errors in forensic identification led to a high number of wrongful convictions and concerns that media coverage portrayals of forensic science evidence on popular television shows leads jurors to unfairly weigh DNA evidence while making their decision about the facts of a trial (Carrell, 2008). Moreover, in recent DNA exoneration cases the courts and jurors had difficulty analyzing the testimony of the experts on forensic identification evidence. According to the article, in 86 DNA exoneration cases, forensic science testing errors were the second leading cause of wrongful conviction, falling behind wrongful eyewitness misidentification (Carrell,
Forensic evidence can provide just outcomes in criminal matters. However, it is not yet an exact science as it can be flawed. It can be misrepresented through the reliability of the evidence, through nonstandard guidelines, and through public perception. Forensic science can be dangerously faulty without focus on the ‘science’ aspect. It can at times be just matching patterns based on an individual’s interpretations. This can lead to a miscarriage of justice and forever alter a person’s life due to a perceived “grey area” (Merritt C, 2010) resulting in a loss of confidence in the reliability of forensic evidence.
Roane, Kit R. “The CSI Effect: On TV, It's All slam-dunk evidence evidence and Quick
In recent years, however, such programs as CSI that follows detectives at the Las Vegas Police Department Crime Scene Investigations Bureau as they solve puzzles and catch criminals. Perhaps one of the most well known shows with a forensic psychology theme, CSI has a large impact on viewers perceptions of forensic psychology. On one hand, the increased popularity of forensic psychology because of the show is good and more people are taking an interest in forensic psychology as a career. On the other hand, the forensic psychology that viewers see every week on television may not be exactly the same as forensic psychology in reality. Particularly programs such as CSI also overstate the ability of “hard” evidence (also known as forensic evidence), such as fingerprints and DNA, to provide evidence of definite innocence or guilt (Trask, 2007). They often disregard other components of the investigative process, such as police questioning, despite these being equally valid to establishing guilt (Nolan, 2006). This over-reliance on forensic evidence, due to the importance of forensic science being dramatized by television crime dramas, is also known as the CSI
Paul House’s murder conviction in 1985 set the stage for the importance of DNA evidence inclusion in murder cases. The fact that it took 22 years to overturn his conviction gives the reason for reform in our criminal justice system (Neubaeur & Fradella, 2009). The public should realize that Hollywood is all lights, camera, action, and does not represent factual information. Most of these shows have that disclaimer at the beginning or end of the segment.
...vitz, M. (2009). Forensic psychology: Emerging topics and expanding roles. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 52(1), 71-71-72.
Forensic Science, recognized as Forensics, is the solicitation of science to law to understand evidences for crime investigation. Forensic scientists are investigators that collect evidences at the crime scene and analyse it uses technology to reveal scientific evidence in a range of fields. Physical evidence are included things that can be seen, whether with the naked eye or through the use of magnification or other analytical tools. Some of this evidence is categorized as impression evidence2.In this report I’ll determine the areas of forensic science that are relevant to particular investigation and setting out in what method the forensic science procedures I have recognized that would be useful for the particular crime scene.